English

1. 1
Introduction to the new funding
model
February, 2014

2. 2
• Bigger impact: focus on countries with the highest disease burden and
lowest ability to pay, while keeping the portfolio global
• Predictable funding: process and financing levels become more
predictable, with higher success rate of applications
• Ambitious vision: ability to elicit full expressions of demand and reward
ambition
• Flexible timing: in line with country schedules, context, and priorities
• More streamlined: for both implementers and the Global Fund
Principles
of the new
funding model
Principles of the new funding model
The Global Fund funding model has been redesigned to bring the Global Fund Strategy
of ‘Investing for Impact’ to life. The new model will improve the way the Global Fund
assesses, approves, disburses, and monitors grants

3. 3
How does the new model differ from the previous
model?
• Passive role by the Secretariat in
influencing investments • More active portfolio management to
optimize impact
• Low predictability: timing of Rounds,
success rates and available funds
• Engagement by Global Fund Country
Teams in country dialogue and concept
note development
• Cumbersome undifferentiated process to
grant signing with different delays • Disbursement-ready grants with
differentiated approach
• Timelines largely defined by the Global
Fund
• Hands-off Secretariat role prior to Board
approval
• Timelines largely defined by each
country
• High predictability: timing, success rates,
indicative funding range
From previous model
To new funding model

4. 4
New funding model cycle and timing
2nd
GAC
Concept Note Grant Making
Board
TRP
GAC
Ongoing Country Dialogue
National
Strategic Plan/
Investment Case
Grant
Implementation

5. 5
Overview of how funds are allocated to countries
1) Eligibility is primarily determined by a country‟s disease
burden and income level.
2) A designated amount of money is reserved for each eligible
country.
3) Qualitative factors will be used to adjust the funding amount
for each country. These factors could lead to both upward and
downward adjustments to the initial amount.
4) A final adjustment is made during country dialogue, once a
country confirms increases to its national funding
commitments for health (called “willingness-to-pay”).

6. 9
Types of funding
Country
allocation
• A separate reserve of funding designed to reward high impact, well-performing
programs and encourage ambitious requests
• It is made available, on a competitive basis, to applicants in Country Bands 1, 2, 3
• Awarding of incentive funding will be based on the TRP recommendation. The GAC will
decide on incentive funding, which will be included in the upper-ceiling of the grant
Incentive
funding*
• Any funding requested through a concept note which is considered strategically
focused and technically sound by the TRP, but cannot be funded through available
funding
• The demand is registered for possible funding by the Global Fund or other donors
when, and if, any new resources become available
Unfunded
quality demand
* Regional applicants, significantly over-allocated disease components and Band 4 countries are not eligible for incentive funding.
• Each eligible country receives an allocation to support its disease programs for the
allocation period (communicated in March 2014)
• The amount is determined using an allocation methodology based on disease burden
and income levels, and is adjusted for qualitative factors

7. On-going Country Dialogue
10

8. 11
The term used by the Global Fund to refer to the ongoing
discussion that occurs at country level to prioritize how to fight the
three diseases and strengthen health and community systems
Concept Note Grant-Making
Ongoing Country Dialogue
National
Strategic Plan
determined by
country
Grant
Implementation
3 years
Govt-led CCM-led PR-led CCM/PR-led
Country dialogue is a country-owned on-going
process
Country owned process
Country
Dialogue

9. 12
Key principles of country dialogue
Ongoing process to develop health strategies
• Develop NSP for the three diseases
• Strengthen health and community systems
Country-led process used to request Global Fund support
• Align funding request on NSP or investment case
• Produce a concept note that maximizes the impact of Global Fund resources
Open, inclusive and participatory process
• Matches involvement of stakeholders to the epidemic in the country
• Builds concept notes based on inputs of those most affected

10. 13
Why do we need inclusiveness in country dialogue?
"...It is essential to deal with strongholds of infection among young women
and girls; men who have sex with men; sex workers; people who inject drugs
and prisoners. If we are going to address this epidemic we must deal with the
strongholds. We must have our tools available for the most vulnerable and
that means creating an inclusive human family."
Mark Dybul
Executive Director
The Global Fund

11. 14
Who plays a role in country dialogue?
Country dialogue
Technical
partners
Civil society /
key populations
Private sector
Country
government
Other donors
Global Fund
These actors meet in the CCM,
however, the dialogue should expand beyond the CCM
Academia

12. 15
Key discussions during country dialogue
Documented
evidence of
impact
Forging a common understanding of a country's disease and health sector
landscape including the latest epidemiological studies and identifying data
gaps; areas for coordination and partnership; and any weaknesses in health or
community systems that could affect disease programs
Disease and
health sector
landscape
Ensuring meaningful participation of people living with HIV, TB or malaria and
key populations in the design, implementation, and monitoring of Global Fund-
supported programs, including an assessment of any legal or policy barriers to
service access, and designing programs to address those barriers
Human Rights
and Inclusion
Conducting program evaluations and other research to determine outcomes
and impact of programs including capacity assessments of health and
community systems to deliver services
Mapping the funding landscape and ensuring alignment and complementarity
between donor and national funding in the overall budget for the disease
response
National,
Donor &
Global Fund
investments

13. Preparing for the Concept Note
16

14. 17
What is the role of CCM?
Initiate pre-concept
note country dialogue
Facilitate robust
country dialogue
Develop concept note

15. 18
Key tasks during concept note preparation
• Conduct national program reviews with technical partners
• Examine existing data and information
• Consider using the JANS criteria
• Take action to strengthen them in areas where weaknesses are found
• Identify when funds are needed for each disease, ensuring continued funding for
existing programs
• Estimate how long the application process will take for your country
• Decide on which submission date best suits your country
• Develop an engagement plan, including how to involve Key Populations and civil
society
• Consider including community organizations, government ministry representatives,
private sector, technical partners, academia, other donors
• Establish a process for ensuring inclusive dialogue
Review national
strategic plans
Plan for inclusive
dialogue key
groups
Plan when to apply
Review CCM
compliance with
eligibility
requirements
1
2
3
4
• Ensure you are following CCM eligibility requirements and minimum standards
• Review CCM governance, and request partner support to performance, where
relevant

16. 19
Key tasks during concept note preparation
• Discuss increases to domestic commitments with the government to ensure the ability
to access the last 15% of the country allocation.
• Define the implementation arrangements for the program
• Assess the main risks related to the effective implementation of the program and each
nominated PR against a set of minimum standards
• Propose risk mitigation measures
• Start the development of an implementation arrangement diagram
• Revise and determine how to split the allocation between eligible disease
components and cross-cutting HSS to better suit the country context
• Agree on what information will be needed to make a decision and who will be the
ultimate decision-maker
• Endorse the proposed split before the first concept note submission to the Secretariat
Begin negotiations
on increased
governmental
commitments
Agree on program
split across
eligible diseases
and HSS activities
Begin discussion
on appropriate
implementation
arrangements
5
6
7

17. Review National Strategic Plans
20

18. 21
Funding requests should be based on national
strategic plans (NSPs)
National Strategic Plan
Sound situational analysis and programming
Inclusive development and endorsement
process
Sound and feasible costs and budgetary
framework
Effective implementation and management
arrangements & systems
Effective monitoring, evaluation and review
mechanisms
A robust NSP meets JANS criteria:
Concept
Note
with prioritized
programmatic
gaps
The new funding model places more emphasis on alignment to country processes, and aims to
incentivize the development of robust, costed and prioritized disease-specific NSPs (and/or
investment cases for HIV) as well as the overall national health strategy

19. 22
Increases
country
funding
Access to incentive funding
Higher probability of funding from Register of
Unfunded Quality Demand
Speeds
up Global
Fund
process
Faster concept note development
Improved concept note quality
Simplified grant management procedures/grant types
Why is a robust NSP important?

20. 23
Robust NSP meets the following criteria*:
• Sound situational analysis and programming
• Inclusive development and endorsement process
• Sound and feasible costs and budgetary framework
• Effective implementation and management arrangements & systems
• Effective monitoring, evaluation and review mechanisms
How do we define a robust NSP?
1
2
3
4
5
*This criteria has been taken from the JANS review process

21. 24
Different scenarios regarding NSP development
What if NSP needs to
be further
strengthened?
What if NSP is
current?
What if NSP needs
to be revised?
Country can apply, however, they must have a robust NSP to
be eligible for incentive funding and register of unfunded
quality demand.
In case of current NSP (i.e. still valid, and based on a recent
review), attach NSP and review docs to concept note.
If NSP needs to be revised (i.e. is about to end, or mid-term
review is due), Global Fund expects countries to
• Conduct a review of their NSP (i.e. program review, mid-
term review, monitoring mission, JANS assessment, etc)...
• … using specific procedures e.g. HIV NSP 3G; TB Toolkit
to Develop National Strategic Plan for TB control; RBM tools
and processes; JANS tool for health sector strategies)
JANS criteria (and tool) are strongly recommended as a
framework for all reviews.

22. 25
• The Global Fund will support reviews of NSPs (similar to other
stakeholders), but NSP reviews and development are the
responsibility of countries with assistance of technical
partners.
• NSP and outcomes of review will be used by TRP and GAC to
help determine whether the NSP is robust enough to qualify
concept note for incentive funding and the Register of
Unfunded Quality Demand.
Facilitative/
Catalytic role
Role of The Global Fund in NSP development

23. 26
What is the role of CCM in developing NSP?
Contributes to the National Strategic Plan / Investment Case development or
revision as required, including any National Strategic Plan reviews that are
commissioned.
Assists the government to
• Identify key stakeholders that should be engaged in development or review of
the national strategic plan – Key Populations, civil society representatives,
human rights and gender specialists, etc
• Engage with stakeholders (including experienced service providers and other
implementers) to update information on existing programs and progress
Provides relevant information as required by the government,
including the results of Global Fund programs.

24. 27
What if NSP is not of good quality* or if there is
no NSP?
• Consider delaying the application until NSP is developed (or
improve NSP in parallel to concept note development).
• Develop more of a 'project-type' concept note
• Can use an investment case (for HIV)
• Include plan to address NSP weaknesses by next allocation period in
the concept note
– Access technical partner support
– Access US$ 150,000 per disease component through reprogramming
*As reviewed under the criteria mentioned in earlier slide

25. 28
Plan for Inclusive Dialogue

26. 29
What are the typical questions raised by CCMs
about country dialogue inclusiveness?
Who should be
included in country
dialogue?
Who are the key
populations and other
affected groups?
How can we engage
with them
meaningfully?
1
2
3
What should they be
engaged in?
• Who should be included in the process?
• What is a sufficient level of inclusion?
• How do we identify the right community
stakeholders?
– What if official epidemiological data is not
available?
• How to deal with legal issues in the country?
• How do ensure that community concerns get
addressed?
• Which stakeholders should be included in what
tasks?
4

27. 30
Who should be included in country dialogue?
Key to identify participants:
Populations who will use and/or provide health
services in program planning
processes, implementation and monitoring and
evaluation:
• Relevant national/international stakeholders
• Key populations and people living with the three
diseases in program design and routine supervision
– Ensure coverage, quality and uptake across the
continuum of prevention, testing, treatment, care
and support, particularly for key populations
Inclusive country
dialogue

28. 31
 CCM members
 Ministry of Health
 Ministry of Finance
 Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Interior,
Parliamentary committee on health
 National disease bodies, e.g., national
AIDS council
 Ministry of Gender/Women
 National human rights institutions
 Civil society, faith-based organizations, legal
and human rights groups
 PEPFAR, PMI, USAID, CDC
 World Bank
 Other key donors for each disease program
 EU members (e.g., DfiD, GIZ, French)
 AusAid
 HIVOS
 European Commission, staff at embassy
human rights/development programs
 Non-public sector implementers (e.g., FBOs)
 Private foundations, such as Levi Strauss
Foundation, Global Fund for Women
 WHO
 UNAIDS
 Stop TB partnership
 Regional and international networks of Key
Populations
 Roll Back Malaria partnership
 UNDP, OHCHR, UNFPA, ILO, UNHCR,
UNICEF, depending on country context
 Open Society Foundations and other private
foundations
 Regional and international human rights
groups
 Pregnant Women
 Community health workers/ volunteers working
on MNCH
 Indigenous peoples, ethnic minorities, rural
communities in endemic areas
 Young people
 Refugees
 Migrants
 Others, depending on country context
In-country organizations
Other funders and
implementers
Global technical partners
HIV Malaria
Decide the level of inclusion based on the country
context and requirements
Inclusion depending on country contextRecommended inclusion
 People who work in settings that facilitate TB
transmission
 Former prisoners
 People living with HIV
 People who use drugs
 Migrants
 Refugees
 Indigenous peoples
 Other, such as labor unions, depending on
country context
 Men, women and young people living with HIV
 Men who have sex with men
 Transgender persons
 People who inject drugs
 Sex workers (male, female, and transgender)
 Women and girls
 Youth
 Other, such as people with disabilities, ethnic
minorities, depending on country context
TB
The number of people of each category depends on country epidemic
context and capacity of each representative to input into country dialogue

29. 32
How do we make the case for key populations
engagement
Use epidemic data to support key populations engagement
• Disease burden (e.g. specific populations being disproportionally affected)
• Incidence data (e.g. outbreaks among specific populations)
• Inequalities in accessing services
• Gender and age disaggregated
If adequate epidemic data is not available
• Request technical assistance from partners to identify and engage key
populations
• Reach out to global, regional, and national community networks and engage
them throughout the process of generating the evidence needed
Credible, trusted individuals should be nominated by and held
accountable to their communities

30. 33
How do we engage with communities, including
key populations?
Encourage caucusing of communities in advance of national meetings
• Ensure they can raise their concerns on human rights, gender, access and other
issues in a safe space without repercussions
• Ensure confidentiality for all participants
• Support their engagement through support for transport, food and lodging for
stakeholders attending meetings
• Convene different groups of women, youth, key populations etc. separately and
collectively as needed. Collective caucusing can help create coalitions, separate
meetings help in-depth discussions on specific needs and issues
Facilitate meaningful participation e.g., national / regional meetings held outside
the capital and in the local language
Ensure communities understand what support they can expect from The Global Fund
to address human rights, CSS, gender inequalities
Ensure concerns raised by communities get raised and addressed during the
country dialogue through lead representatives

31. 34
What should the different stakeholders
be engaged in?
Country dialogue stakeholders Country dialogue tasks
Agree on the key stakeholders that should
be engaged in the concept note
development in order to meet the CCM
Eligibility Requirement #1
• Government
• Civil Society
• People living with the diseases
• Technical Partners
• Key Populations
• Other funders & implementers
Agree on areas in which each stakeholder
should be engaged
• Epi analysis and program reviews
• NSP development and review
• Concept note development and writing
• Input on concept note draft before submission
• Grant making
• Program monitoring
Practical tip: Agree upfront on the stakeholder engagement plan
Communities, of key populations, women etc. should give as sufficient level of input in
the country dialogue as any other country dialogue stakeholders
+

32. 35
Key takeaways on inclusive dialogue
Country dialogue is a key component of the Global Fund
application process.
• Involves participation from all key stakeholders, in alignment
with the epidemic in the country
• Produces a concept note that can maximize the impact of
Global Fund resources
CCMs should be proactive in preparing for and overseeing the
country dialogue process.
• Kick-start the process by engaging the stakeholders of the
dialogue as early as possible.
• Leverage the relevant stakeholders to make things happen.
1
2

33. 36
Plan when to apply

34. 37
Key principles around timing in the new funding
model
Flexible timing for application to maximize concept note
quality
Alignment with country fiscal cycle is recommended
NSP alignment is an advantage but is not compulsory
Submission of one concept note per disease per
replenishment
Availability of up to 12 month costed & uncosted extensions to
help align timing
4
1
2
3
5
Concept note should present a consolidated request for existing and new funds

35. 38
Time required for new funding model stages also
depends on country context
2 months 1.5 months*
• Up-to-date and costed national strategic plan or
investment case with agreed priorities
• Strong CCM and PRs that meet minimum standards
2 months 3 months*
3 months 3 months*
NSP development
8 months
11 months
3 months
Concept note writing
TRP and GAC review
Grant making
Time from dialogue to 1st disbursement
Pre-concept note country dialogue
From Board approval to 1st disbursement
1 month
1 month
• Need time for country dialogue to agree on priorities and consult stakeholders
• PRs and implementation arrangements are satisfactory
• Lack clear strategy or viable extension plan through grant period
• Weak CCM and/or implementers
• Weak technical partners in-country
1 month
AcceleratedAverageLong
* This is the anticipated average scenario – it may take longer in some countries.
17 months
2 months
2 months
2 months
7 months
Timing of concept note submission has to be aligned to one of the TRP / GAC windows

36. 39
CCMs choose one of the submission dates for
each component
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9
201420152016
TRP TRP TRP TRP
TRP TRP TRP TRP
TRP
# Submission deadline on 15th of the month
TRP review meeting (approx.)TRP
Submission deadline for EoI (regionals only)
EoI
EoI

37. 40
Extension of the current implementation period for grants by up to 12 months
in strongly justified exceptional circumstances:
• The extension would only be available for alignment purposes as a last resort
and on exceptional basis
• Standard extension would also need to cover grants ending before 31 Dec 2014
with no other funding option to bridge disruption (no TFM, interim funding, etc.)
before NFM grant can be signed
Costed extensions (borrowed from allocation), subject to approval
Non-costed extensions (uncommitted Funds/Savings), subject to approval
New extension policy
(to be approved by the Board in March 2014)
Extensions should be used sparingly (for strongly justified cases)
1
2
3

38. 41
Review CCM Eligibility

39. 42
1
2
3
4
5
6
Develop, publish and follow a policy to manage conflict of interest that
applies to all CCM members, across all CCM functions
Ensure representation of non-governmental members through transparent
and documented processes
Document the representation of affected communities
Overseeing program implementation and having an oversight plan
Open and transparent PR selection process
Transparent and inclusive concept note development process
3 to 6
monitored
on going
basis
1 and 2
assessed at
CN
submission
CCM Eligibility Requirements
Changes under the new funding model

40. 43
New: There is a simplified PR selection approach
to re-select well-performing PRs
In cases where the CCM is re-selecting well-performing PRs (grant rating*: A1, A2, B1),
supporting documentation may include
• The criteria (i.e. past performance, implementation capacity and sub-recipient management) used
by the CCM to decide to continue with an existing well-performing PR nomination.
• If applicable, copies of any invitations made to existing PR(s) of the same disease component to
submit an expression of interest to continue as PR.
• CCM conflict of interest policy and documentation illustrating how it was applied to the PR re-
selection process.
• Minutes of CCM meetings where PR re-selection is discussed and voted upon. Minutes should
include a summary of discussions, a list of participants, decision points and a record of who and
which constituency took part in the decision making process.
• The Global Fund recommends that the voting process for re-selecting PR(s) be done via secret
ballot to avoid undue pressure on stakeholders and the potential manipulation of voting results.
Supporting documentation which clearly outlines the process and the results must be provided.
*Based on the latest available rating provided by The Global Fund

41. 44
New: Presence of those most impacted by HIV,
tuberculosis and malaria, required on the CCM
• For TB and malaria in contexts: where those diseases are a public
health issue (regardless of whether Global Fund funding has been
requested or not)
• e.g. in cases where a CCM does not have a TB representative,
although TB is a significant issue in the country
• Of persons that are both living with and representing people living with
HIV on CCMs
• Taking into account the socio-epidemiological context.
• Direct or indirect representation of Key Populations on CCMs will be
possible, especially in countries where some Key Populations are
marginalized or criminalized
Specifically including Key
Populations as a CCM
requirement
1
Increasing representation2
Linking the need for
representatives
3

42. 45
New: All CCMs will be expected to meet minimum
standards by January 2015
Minimum Standards will be compulsory at grant signing as of January 1, 2015
Minimum Standards express the Global Fund‟s expectations of CCM performance
Review CCM
performance
against the
Minimum
Standards to
determine TA
needs
Conduct an
annual self-
assessment
against the CCM
Minimum
Standards
Choose a TA
provider to
support the
assessment and
develop an
action plan
Implement the
action plan to
meet the
minimum
standards
Minimum
Standards
enforced at grant
signing as of
January 1, 2015
2014 Benchmarking January 1, 20152013

43. 46
• Facilitates annual CCM performance assessment (requirements 3, 4,
5 and 6)
• Information captured by the tool allows CCM self-reflection about its
performance
• Contains indicators for CCM eligibility requirements (mandatory for
submitting a Concept Note) and CCM minimum standards
(mandatory for signing a grant - enforceable as of 1 January 2015).
The tool...
For
requirements
3, 4, 5, 6
Annual performance assessment tool

44. 47
Begin negotiations on increased
government funding commitments

45. 48
How does ‘Counterpart Financing’ work under the
new funding model?
Mandatory minimum requirements
of counterpart financing
• Minimum threshold contribution (LI-
5%, Lower LMI-20%, Upper LMI-
40%, UMI-60%)
• Increasing government contribution
to disease programs and health
sector
• Reliable disease and health
expenditure data
‘Willingness-to-Pay’ commitment
to further incentivize
• Additional co-investments by
government in disease programs
in accordance with ability to pay
• Realization of planned government
commitments
Core Global Fund principles:
Sustainability, Additionality, Country Ownership

46. 49
How much money is accessible from the Global
Fund for Willingness-to-Pay?
The allocation amount, as communicated by The Global Fund, includes 15% that is only
accessible based on additional government investments.
Disease burden
Income level
External financing
Minimum required
level
Grant performance
Increasing infection
rate
Absorptive capacity
Risk
Impact
= Country allocation
Allocation formula Qualitative factors
US$ 85 million + Maximum
US$ 15 million for
Willingness to Pay
US$ 100 millionUS$ 90 millionExample:
15% of which
accessible based on
Willingness-to-Pay

47. 50
What counts towards Willingness to Pay
commitments?
Counterpart financing in the next phase, which is
– Beyond current levels of government spending or over minimum threshold
requirements, whichever is higher
– Committed to strategic areas of the national disease programs supported by the
Global Fund and/or health systems strengthening to address bottlenecks in
management and service delivery of programs supported by the Global Fund
– Not less than already planned spending: Additional investments should not be
lower than already existing government commitments for the next phase
– Verifiable through budgets or equivalent official documentation on an annual basis

48. 51
Consideration of Government investments in new
funding model
• Government investments are a core focus under the new funding model – will impact annual
disbursements
• Level of government commitments required to access the total Willingness-to-Pay component
will depend on country allocation, existing commitments, past spending trends, country
income, and fiscal space.
• Additional investments required to access Willingness-to-Pay allocation can be prioritized by
the Government to any Global Fund supported disease program, including relevant HSS
• CCM formally submits government commitments to the Global Fund prior to or along with
first concept note submission
• Agree on the following through country dialogue process:
• Mechanisms for public financing of disease programs
• Calendar of investments planned by the government over the next phase and the
specific interventions/activities financed by these investments
• Timing and mechanism of tracking and reporting government spending on an annual
basis

49. 52
Willingness-to-Pay commitment: Roles and
Responsibilities
Review and
communication
Country dialogue
Pre-country dialogue
Portfolio Review
CCM tasks
• Facilitate setting up of
negotiations
• Clarify issues raised by the
Global Fund
• Support negotiations
• Assess compliance with
requirements of government
contribution
• Submit government commitments
prior to or along with the first
concept note
Government
tasks
• Provide necessary
background information
• Provide clarifications
during Secretariat
review, if required
• Engage in negotiations
• Commit additional government investments
• Provide a calendar of government investments
• Provide supporting documentation, where applicable
Concept note
Submission

50. 53
Program Split: Agree on how to split
funds from the Global Fund

51. 54
Program split: What is the process?
GF reviews
proposed
split based
on set
criteria
Proposed
split is
potentially
revised
and
concept
note is
adjusted
CCM submits
proposed
split before
concept note
submission
or at the time
of first
concept note
submission
CTs and
CCM
discuss
Disease
split
during
country
dialogue
CTs
communicate
allocation via
the letter of
allocation
Countries may
request early
review of the split
if desired

52. 55
Global Fund provides one allocation amount across all eligible disease
components.
Allocation announcement contains
• A breakdown by disease component for information only (countries may propose a
different split)
• Calculation methodology used for disease funding share allocation
• Historical allocation of GF funding and identified over/under allocated disease
components*
• Band allocation, for the respective country, based on disease burden and income level
• Amount of potential incentive funding available for band
CCM proposes a program split between eligible
diseases and HSS
$
HIV
Allocation
$
TB
Allocation
$
MAL
Allocation
Overall
allocation
for country x
*To be approved by the Steering Committee

53. 56
The Global Fund will provide no guidelines / limits on how funds should be split
among the 3 diseases and HSS.
Cross-cutting HSS investment guidance is differentiated by bands.
• Band 1: Investment strongly encouraged
• Bands 2,3: Investment encouraged
• Band 4: Investment may be considered on an exceptional basis
For information, the historic levels of disbursements for HSS are provided, but
CCMs should invest what is needed for their country:
• Band 1: historical average of 11%
• Bands 2,3: historical average of 8%
• Band 4: None
How much can the country invest in HSS?

54. 57
Prepare in advance for the program split
discussion
1
2
3
Set up ground rules
Encourage definition of
participants roles
Facilitate agreement on analyses /
info each group will provide
Facilitate agreement on decision-
making process
Mitigate conflicts
Understand in-going positions
Include challenging participants
1
2

55. 58
Key principles on who should be involved in
decision-making process
Balanced representation across
eligible diseases
Specific engagement of KAP
Representation of HSS
Anonymous vote is
recommended for crucial
decisions

56. 59
When must decision be made by?
Who should decide the process if no agreement could be reached?
What information should be brought by each group?
Who should be involved in decision-making process?
What could be the decision-making process?
4
1
2
3
Practical tip: Agree upfront on the decision making
process
5
Key rules that should be set up upfront

57. 60
Begin discussion on appropriate
implementation arrangements

58. 61
Distribution
systems & transportation
arrangements are efficient
to ensure secure and
continued supply
Central &
regional warehousing have
capacity, & aligned with
good storage practices
Minimum Standards for PRs
PR demonstrates effective
management structures and
planning
PR has the
capacity & systems for
effective management &
oversight of SRs
Data-collection capacity and
tools are in place to monitor
program performance
Functional routine reporting
system
with reasonable coverage to
report program performance
1 2
Internal control system of
PR is effective to prevent &
detect misuse or fraud
The financial management
system of the PR is effective
& accurate
5 6 7
8
9
4
Implementers have
capacity to comply with
quality requirements & monitor
product quality throughout the in-
country supply chain
The Global Fund will expect grant implementers to meet minimum standards
3

59. 62
New task: implementation arrangement mapping
PR
? ?
? ?? ?
PR
SR ?
? ?? ?
PR
SR SR
SSR SSR
Pre-submission CD CN submission Post Grant signing
Identify key entities and flow of funds:
• Entities roles and proportion of the grant value they are managing
Identify potential risk factors:
• PRs / SRs handling large amount of funds
• Procurement & supply chain arrangements
• Interactions between grants
• External entities that influence implementation
Prioritize risk through capacity assessment:
• Share with Technical Partners a common view on risk analysis
Mapping is an iterative process showing what is known and unknown at a point of time
1
2
3
Important Note:
Implementation
arrangement map is
mandatory for all new
grants

60. 63
Where can Country Teams support CCMs on
activities prior to concept note submission?
Explain new funding model process
• CCM eligibility requirements
• Allocation
• Concept note
Communicate key portfolio issues and discuss implementation arrangements
Agree on approach to concept note development
• Timing of application
• Participants
• Program split discussion and decision making
Facilitate access to technical assistance
Be part of negotiations on counterpart financing and willingness to pay
commitment

61. 64
What are the responsibilities of other stakeholders?
Civil society and key
populations
Country government /
National Disease Program
In-country technical partners
• Provide ongoing and meaningful
input into development of strategy
and funding request
• Ensure the final concept note and
grant-making takes into the
account needs from key
population groups
• Help identify and monitor legal or
policy barriers to services
• Participate in country dialogue and
co-ordination
• Assist in the development of a
clear funding overview by country
Other donors
• Supports the CCM to determine
the ideal submission timing for
concept notes to correspond with
national health strategy
• Ensures coordination between
different donors
• Defines and follows up on national
commitments
• Discuss disease landscape with
in-country stakeholders
• Support development of an
accessible knowledge base of
available data in country
• Ensure domestic or regional
experts are included in country
dialogue
• Review program performance
Private sector
• Provides inputs in the
development of concept note in
areas expertise
• Shares country-specific
knowledge of key topics
• Identifies opportunities for
operational research
Academia
• Share expertise to inform concept
note development
• Explain any financial contribution
to the three diseases
• Highlight opportunities to leverage
private sector: management and
finance support to PRs, channel
for service delivery and increasing
access, solutions for supply chain

62. 65
Tools & templates available to support country
dialogue (1/2)
What is available? What is it? Where is it?
• Engagement plan template
Checklist of the key events of the process and
agreement on the list of participants
Request from
Country Team
• TA request form
Template to request technical assistance from
partners
Coming soon on
Global Fund website
• CCM minutes template
Word / excel template to submit minutes of CCM
meetings
click here
• JANS tool
List of attributes & criteria to perform a preliminary
assessment of the NSP
click here
• Guidelines and
requirements for CCM
Guidelines to CCM on their role in Global Fund
processes
click here
• Program split form
Form to submit decision regarding split of funds
between eligible diseases and HSS
Coming soon on
Global Fund website
• Willingness-to-Pay form
Form where CCM records the additional
government investments
Coming soon on
Global Fund website

63. 66
Tools & templates available to support country
dialogue (2/2)
What is available? What is it? Where is it?
• CN template and guidelines
– Programmatic gap table
– Modular tool
– Financial gap analysis
and counterpart
financing table
– CCM endorsement form
template
Excel template to map coverage from other donors
and funding request to the Global Fund
Excel template to map impact and outcome
indicators of the program
Excel template to map funding needs & resources
Form for endorsement form of the final concept
note by all CCM members
click here
• Capacity assessment tool
Tool used by the Secretariat to assess the capacity
of key implementers
Request from
Country Team

64. 67
Resources available for CCMs
1
2
3
New funding model Resource Book
Frequently Asked Questions about the
new funding model
Online learning materials on key topics
(e-learning modules)
Concept note templates and guidelines
Information notes
4
Resource Source
click here
click here
Coming soon on
Global Fund website
click here
click here5

65. 68
The concept note

66. 69
• Principal document for TRP and GAC
reviews and grant-making purposes
• Output from country dialogue, reflective of
an inclusive multi-stakeholder process
• Encourages robust and ambitious funding
request
• Funding request based on the national
strategic plan
• Captures “full expression of demand‟‟
The concept note

67. 70
Concept note will capture the full expression of
demand
In the concept note:
• Full expression of demand
captured at a higher level based
on a costed national strategy
• Applicant will determine which
program elements of their full
expression of demand should be
in their request above the
allocation
Applicants encouraged to
apply for their full
expression of demand

68. 71
Upper-ceiling
of funding for
grant
Technically
sound
Country
allocation
(existing +
incremental)
Request
above the
allocated
amount
Incentive
Quality demand
Concept
note
TRP Review GAC
Illustrative example: assumes that the whole funding request is technically sound
Country
allocation
Funding request to be prioritized across the
allocation amount and the amount requested above
Total funding
request

69. 72
A concept note outlines the reasons for Global Fund investment:
• Describes a strategy, supported by technical data that shows why this approach will be
effective.
• Prioritizes a country‟s needs within a broader context, guided by a national health
strategy and a national disease strategic plan
• Describes how implementation can maximize the impact of the investment
Prioritizing investments means making hard choices about what programs can
make the most of Global Fund support
Results-based funding requires a constant reassessment and reprogramming of
existing funds to maximize their usefulness
The Global Fund and applicants must constantly look for ways to adapt and
adjust, to respond to the changing landscape of the diseases
How should we use the concept note?

70. 73
• Core tables
• CCM Eligibility & endorsement
• Supporting documents
Define the problem and assess
response to date
Understand the funding landscape
Section
+
Prioritize funding needs and choose
best response for highest impact
Instructions &
Information Notes
Provide guidance to
applicant on how to
integrate key issues such
as human rights, gender,
SOGI, operational risk
1
3
Overview of the structure of the standard concept
note
Ensure appropriate implementation
capacity and risk mitigation
2
The CCM will submit the
Concept Note in most cases
4

71. 74
Core tables & templates in a standard concept note
Programmatic Gap
Table(s)
Modular Template
Financial Gap
Analysis &
Counterpart
Financing Table*
1 2
3
Tables
List of Abbreviations
and Annexes
4
CCM Eligibility
Requirements**
CCM Endorsement
of Concept Note**
Templates
* Not applicable to stand-alone HSS or applications from Regional Organizations, Regional Coordinating Mechanisms and Non-CCMs
** Not applicable to applications from Regional Organizations and Non-CCMs

72. 75
Situational analysis of
the current and
changing
epidemiological
context in the country
Whatisrequested?
Define the problem, including geographic variations
Define constraints and barriers to an appropriate response
Consider:
- Community system constraints
- Health system constraints
- Human rights barriers
- Key populations with disproportionately low access to services
1
2
Describe:
- The impact of the national response to the disease
- Country processes for reviewing and revising the response
based on outcomes achieved and lessons learned
Provide information based on national strategic disease
plan(s)
1
2
Assessment of the
current national
response against the
disease
(Standard) Step 1:
Define the problem and assess response to date
Section
1
A
B

73. 76
(Standard) Step 2: Understand the funding
landscape, additionality and sustainability
Section
2
An outline of the
current & anticipated
funding landscape of
the national program
over the proposed
grant duration
Whatisrequested?
Include current and future commitments
(government and donor) towards the disease(s)
Demonstrate:
- Compliance with counterpart financing
requirements and planned actions to reach
compliance
- Government‟s willingness-to-pay
commitments and how they will be tracked and
reported
1
2
Identify the funding gaps of the national program3
Financial
Gap
Analysis &
Counterpart
Financing
Table
Table 1

74. 77
(Standard) Step 3: Prioritize funding needs and
choose best response for highest impact
Section
3
Positioning the
country’s prioritized
funding request within
the country context,
through a selection of
appropriate modules
Whatisrequested?
Prioritization should be evidence-based and
build on the analysis provided in sections 1
and 2
Prioritization of modules across and within:
- the country allocation and
- the amount requested above the country
allocation
+ justification
1
2
- Choose the best interventions to achieve
the highest impact with the investment
- Propose expected impact and outcome from
additional investments above the country
allocation
3
Programm-
atic Gap
Table 2
Modular
Template
Table 3
LMIs & UMIs: Ensure compliance with the „focus of application‟
on key populations and/or highest impact interventions
4

75. 78
(Standard) Step 4: Ensure appropriate
implementation capacity and risk mitigation
Section
4
Information on the
implementation
capacity of PRs and
risk mitigation
measures to program
delivery
Whatisrequested?
Overview of implementation arrangements
- Include dual-track financing
- Describe coordination among implementers
- Identify any anticipated challenges
Include an implementation arrangement diagram
(not required at concept note submission)
1
2
For each PR, complete the „minimum standards for
implementers‟ assessment
3
Describe current or anticipated risks to program
delivery and/or PR performance, including the
proposed mitigation measures
4

76. 79
Global Fund is moving to a modular approach for
grant making
It runs throughout a grant's lifecycle, providing
consistency at each stage
– During the concept note stage, a funding request
is defined by selecting a set of interventions per
module to align with national strategy
– During the grant making stage, each approved
intervention is further defined by identifying and
describing the required sets of activities
– During grant implementation, progress of each
intervention is monitored as laid out in the prior
stages
Program level
Module
Intervention
Activity

77. 80
Benefits of the modular approach
• Incorporates terminology already being used by countries and
partners
• “Service Delivery Areas” (SDAs) were applied inconsistently,
presenting challenges for portfolio level analysis. These have
been replaced by “interventions”.
• Enables the flow of content from approved concept note into
grant making stage
• Avoiding complex budgeting at concept stage and using broad
estimates, leaving detailed budgeting for collaborative grant
making process
Single, common
and well defined
framework for
grant making
1
• Includes modules, intervention and associated budget
• Allows for comparison between funding and performance at
the intervention level
• Ensures tracking of key program elements with focus on
coverage and impact
• Minimizes the use of multiple separate grant documents
(budgets, PSM plan, performance framework) which were
developed & reviewed in parallel without clear links
Single template
for activities,
funding, and
indicators for
performance
assessment
2

78. 81
HIV
Malaria
TB
Treatment care
and support
PMTCT
Program
management
Pre-ART Care
ART therapy
Treatment
monitoring
CD4 testing
Training of health
workers
Baseline clinical
assessment
Procurement of
ARVs
M&E
Counselling and
Psych-social
Support
Treatment
adherence
HSS
Activities (not
standardized)
InterventionsModulesComponent
....
Impact/outcome
indicators
Coverage/output
indicators
Work-plan tracking
measures
Example: HIV-Treatment Care and Support

79. 82
Concept notes can be of various types, depending on type
of request and country context
Standard
(H-T-M)
TB-HIV* HSS
RCM
& RO
Multi-
country
applica-
tions**
Non-CCM
Differen-
tiated
approach
1 2 3
76
4 5
Two-stepapproachfor
regionalapplicants
Expression
of Interest
(optional
template)
* Mandatory for countries
identified by WHO with a
high co-infection rate
** Countries whose
individual allocations are
pooled together in one
funding request, e.g.
small island economies

80. 83
Describe:
- Plans for further alignment of the TB and HIV strategies,
policies and interventions at different levels of the health
systems and community
- The barriers that need to be addressed in this alignment
process
Conduct joint planning and alignment of TB and HIV
Strategies, Policies and Interventions
1
2
TB and HIV single concept note:
Joint Planning and Programming

81. 84
• All countries receiving Global Fund‟s support for disease programs are
eligible for HSS investments
• Request by including one or more cross-cutting HSS module‟s in one or more
disease Concept Note (s), or by preparing a separate HSS concept note for a
stand-alone cross-cutting HSS grant
• Upper-middle income countries with “high” disease burden are not eligible,
and can‟t submit a HSS concept note for a HSS grant
• Disease-specific interventions with spill-over effects on health system
components relevant to only one disease program (labelled as “disease-
specific HSS” under the Rounds-based system) are allowed and can be
embedded in disease grant; not labelled as “HSS”
Eligibility for HSS funding

82. 85
Flexibility for requesting funding for HSS
Option When to consider
Not requesting funding for cross-
cutting HSS
When sufficient resources are available from domestic and other donors‟ resources
to address cross-cutting HSS needs, ensuring successful implementation of
HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria programs
Including cross-cutting HSS in
disease requests
When cross-cutting HSS needs are identified, which cannot be resourced by
domestic or other donors‟ resources, but countries do not wish to prepare a separate
HSS Concept Note for a stand-alone HSS grant
Developing a separate HSS
Concept Note for stand-alone HSS
grant
All countries, except upper middle-income countries with “high disease burden”, (as
defined by the eligibility policy) are eligible to develop a separate funding request for
a stand-alone cross-cutting HSS grant.
Single TB-HIV Concept Note 41 countries with high TB/HIV co-infection burden are expected to submit a single
concept note for the two diseases. These countries are strongly encouraged to
consider cross-cutting HSS needs
Aligning multiple disease-specific
Concept Notes
In order to better coordinate a broader health response, improve alignment and
reduce fragmentation between disease-specific programs, some countries may
choose to prepare 2 or 3 eligible disease Concept Notes simultaneously. These
countries are strongly encouraged to consider cross-cutting HSS needs.

83. 86
• Five components of the health system are prioritized for HSS investments
based on programmatic risk analysis:
 Procurement and supply chain management
 Health management information system
 Health and community workforce
 Service delivery
 Financial management
• Limited flexibility beyond this, with strong justification:
• - direct link to ATM outcomes & complementary to proposed HSS & focus on
key populations & no other resources available.
Prioritized scope of HSS investments

84. 87
Approach to regional applications: two-step process
87
Submission
of EOI
Review of
EOI
Concept Note
Submission
Review of
Concept
Note
If eligible
Step 1 Step 2
• All regional applicants must submit an expression of interest (EOI) before developing a CN
• A review of EOI will take place to determine: eligibility; strategic focus and regional impact;
potential indicative amounts
• Only eligible and strategically focused applications can submit a CN
• Two submission windows: one in 2014 and one 2015

85. 88
Objectives of EoI
• Provides a high-level summary of who,
what, how much and expected impact.
• Determines if the regional funding request
is strategically focused.
Needs to have enough detail to make a
decision on whether or not to move
forward
Applicant Summary
Applicant type (RCM or RO) and disease,
countries involved and preliminary
information on CCM endorsements
1
Brief description
Context of proposed scope, cost, expected
impact and justification for a regional approach
2
Timeline and risks
Proposed implementation timeline and key risks
3
Structure of EoI
Submission of Expression of Interest

86. 89
Human rights, gender, CSS interventions are part of
the health response, and included in grants
Health is
improved
Critical enablers
Strengthen health systems (HSS)
Strengthen community systems (CSS)
Protect and promote human rights
Fund programs that strengthen response
for women and girls
Address needs of MSM, transgender
people, sex workers
Strengthen linkages between RMNCH and
HIV, TB, and malaria services
2
1
3
4
5
6
Health
services are
•Available
•Sustainable
•High quality
•Accessible to
all
•Respect
rights/
enabling
environment
Output Impact

87. 90
Countries must identify human rights barriers to
access
Discrimination
Fear of arrest for
criminalized key
populations
Forced sterilization
Gender inequality
Migrants lack ID cards
Lack of legal aid
Police abuse
No right to register an NGO
Prison overcrowding
Denial that key pops exist

88. 91
Human rights interventions for Global Fund grants
Interventions
Use a rights-based approach to health services
• Consult with key populations for HIV, TB and
malaria
• Put the person at the center, tailor services to
their needs, integrate services with local
community platforms
Package to remove legal barriers to access
• Legal environment assessment
• Law and policy reform
• Legal literacy
• Legal aid services
• Rights training for officials, health workers, and
police
• Community-level monitoring
• Policy advocacy and social accountability
Examples
• In South Africa, prisoner support groups monitor
and advocate on treatment access
• Myanmar networks of PLHIV and key populations
monitor local cases of medical discrimination
against PLHIV and TB patients, and work with a
national law reform working group to change the
laws
• In Kenya, KELIN provides legal aid to women living
with HIV who lose their inheritance rights
• In Indonesia, LBH Masyarakat trains people who
inject drugs as community paralegals for peers
These programs give new entry points for testing and
treatment, boost adherence, and empower
communities to advocate for prevention, treatment
and high-quality care.

89. 92
Community system strengthening interventions
Community system strengthening (CSS) is defined as an approach that
promotes the development of informed, capable and coordinated communities,
community-based organizations, groups, networks and structures.
Four kinds of interventions the Global Fund will support:
Community-level monitoring for accountability
Policy advocacy for social accountability
Social mobilization, building community linkages, collaboration and coordination
Institutional capacity building, planning and leadership development in the
community sector
1
2
3
4
Community-led service provision now fully integrated
into health service modules

90. 93
All programs should be gender-responsive
Differentiating needs &
vulnerabilities
Barriers to access
Burdens of care
Address other gender-
based issues
Sex-disaggregated data
Programs linked with
RMNCH services
Take into account the different needs and vulnerabilities of women and men, girls
and boys because of existing gender norms
Reduce women‟s and girls‟ barriers to access to prevention, treatment and care,
especially by addressing specific needs of women and girls living with diseases
Address disproportionate burdens of care and support on women and the elderly
Address gender-based violence, early or forced marriage, lack of access to
education, etc.
Include programs that are linked with RMNCH services, for easier access and
integrated health services for women and girls
Collect and report with sex-disaggregated data for monitoring and evaluation

91. National
Strategic Plan
determined by
country
94
2nd
GAC
Concept Note Grant-Making
Board
TRP
GAC
Ongoing Country Dialogue
Grant
Implementation
3 years
2. Using evidence, help
government identify barriers to
services, and good programs
that should be scaled up
Ensure your representatives are
included in country dialogue
1. Key populations,
women‟s networks,
human rights , CBOs:
• Caucus and strategize
• Have data to show
need not being met
3. Advocate for
representation in writing
group to create concept
note
Review the concept note!,
ensure interventions to
achieve impact
CCM, domestic
civil society and
KPs review
evidence, identify
gaps and priorities
4. Review guidance from
TRP on impact, targets and
indicators the grant should
focus upon
5. Identify the detailed activities
necessary to achieve impact
6. Identify implementers most
appropriate to deliver the
activities and ensure impact
The new funding model: Entry points for civil
society, key populations

92. 95
Grant Management Platform:
Automation

93. 96
Grant Management Platform
CCMs complete the concept note
(including the narrative and core
components) and supporting
documentation
PR use the platform for
grant-making
The GF Secretariat will access
the final application on-line
CCMs RPs
LFAs TGF
Platform
to create, approve, manage
grants

94. 97
Grant Management Platform - Demo

95. 98
Roll-out and use of Grant Management Platform
Language
Materials &Training
Timeline
The platform will be available in English, French, Spanish and Russian
Advanced training will be available for CCM-designated
administrator(s) of the Platform
CCMs are encouraged to identify technical or capacity gaps which would
prevent usage of the online system (with the support of GF Country Teams)
The grant management platform with detailed guidance will be available to
CCMs April 1, 2014

96. 99
Concept Note Review & Approval:
Technical Review Panel &
Grant Approvals Committee

97. 100
What is the Technical Review Panel looking for?
Soundness of approach
Feasibility
Potential for sustainable outcomes
Value for money
The TRP is an independent panel of international experts that reviews and assesses the
prioritized interventions in the concept note.
Criteria for
reviewing
funding
requests

98. 101
What does the Grant Approval Committee take into
acount?
The GAC determines the upper-ceiling for the budget and awards incentive funding
TRP’s recommendations
Sustainability
Strategic focus
Reward strong performance
Ambition of the request
Ensures adequate investment in gender, CSS,
human rights and key populations

99. 102
Practical advice
Technical Review Panel
Start discussing important
strategic changes early
Make sure the concept note
clearly indicates strategic
choices that will deliver maximim
impact in the long term
Grant Approval Committee
1
2
Ensure rigorous and comprehensive
programmatic gap analysis with
focus on coverage and outcomes
Provide detailed information on
domestic contributions
Clearly state priorities for incentive
funding
1
2
3

100. 103
Grant Making

101. 104
What is grant-making?
Translation of the approved
interventions, based on the
TRP and GAC
recommendations, into
disbursement-ready grants
for Board approval and
signature
Create work plan for the development of the
grant documents
Negotiate grant documents and
implementation details with Principal
Recipients
Identify and mitigate capacity gaps and risks
related to the grant implementers and grant
implementation

102. 105
Practical advice for successful grant-making?
Start grant-making as soon as the
concept note is submitted
Retain the engagement of the country
dialogue partners
Plan to spend quality time with your
Country Team
Maintain the linkages set out in the
modular template
Anticipate procurement lead times
Be realistic about the capacity of
implementers
Implementer choice should be based
on most effective delivery of the
interventions

103. 106
Grant Approval

104. 107
How does it work?
What is the GAC looking for?
• Rigorous financial and budget review, that results
in cost efficiencies which can be re-invested for
greater impact
• Clarification of key strategies and actions for
follow up during program implementation
• Determination of final programmatic scope
• Identification of funding gaps to be added to the
register of unfunded quality demand
Country Team submit
• Proposed Grant Agreement
• Implementation Assessment of
Principal Recipient
• Concept Note
• Grant-making Issues
Documentation Form, describing
how the issues raised by the TRP
and GAC have been addressed
during grant making

105. 108
Grant Approval Process
GAC reviews
disbursement-
ready grant
and submits a
final report to
the Board
The GF
Board
reviews and
approves
grants
The GF signs
the Grant
Agreement after
the Principal
Recipient and
CCM have
signed
The GF
and PR set
the grant
start date

106. Questions?

107. 110
BACKUP SLIDES

108. 111
HANDOUT: Consider these groups to make your country
dialogue inclusive
In-country organizations
 CCM members
 Ministry of Health
 Ministry of Finance
 Ministry of Gender/Women
 Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Interior,
Parliamentary committee on health
 National disease bodies, e.g., national AIDS council
 National human rights institutions
 Civil society, e.g., Aids Alliance, faith-based
organizations, legal and human rights groups
Other funders and
implementers
 PEPFAR, PMI, USAID, CDC
 EU members (e.g., DfiD, GIZ, French)
 AusAid
 HIVOS
 European Commission, staff at embassy human
rights/development programs
 Private foundations, such as Levi Strauss
Foundation, Global Fund for Women, depending
on context
 Non-public sector implementers (e.g., FBOs)
 World Bank
Global technical partners
 UNAIDS
 Stop TB partnership
 Roll Back Malaria partnership
 WHO
 UNDP, OHCHR, UNFPA, ILO, UNHCR, UNICEF,
depending on country context
 Open Society Foundations
 Regional and international networks of KAPs
 Regional and international human rights groups
HIV
 People living with HIV
 Men who have sex with men
 Transgender persons
 People who inject drugs
 Sex workers (male, female, and transgender)
 Women and girls
 Youth
 Other, such as people with disabilities, ethnic
minorities, depending on country context
TB
 People who work in settings that facilitate TB
transmission
 Prisoners
 Migrants
 Refugees
 Indigenous peoples
 People living with HIV
 People who use drugs
 Other, such as labor unions, depending on country
context
Malaria
 Refugees
 Migrants
 Community health workers/ volunteers working on
MNCH
 Other, such as indigenous peoples, depending on
country context

109. 112
HANDOUT: Develop an engagement plan
Some example ideas are below
Who should be
involved
In what should
they be involved
How to engage
them
When key events
will occur
Government
Civil society
Technical partners
Other funders
Key affected
populations
People living with
the disease
National strategic
plan development
Epi analysis &
program reviews
Concept note writing
Country dialogue
Grant making
Through caucuses
In safe spaces
Through lead
representative
Draft concept note
sent for TRP review
Date when new
funds are needed
Concept note
submission (target
date)
At national
conferences
In writing group
Major meetings and
consultations
TRP / GAC input
received